Wisconsin native, conservative critic of everything.
"Once abolish the God, and the government becomes the God." ---G K Chesterton
"The only objective of Liberty is Life" --G K Chesterton
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions" --G K Chesterton
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling

I highly doubt Roberts was swayed by “threats” by liberals. Besides, of all people Dad29, you should appreciate the “buy more ammo” mantra IF those statements made by politicians and the media were “extremely hostile” and led Roberts to have a change of heart because he was “intimidated”. Right in your wheelhouse.

Regardless, Roberts has every right to take a different course of action. Recall that during oral arguments he specifically asked questions whether the mandate could be upheld under Congress’ taking authority. It is just as likely that Roberts voted on the matter based on his initial thoughts, clarified his position because he had doubts on the issue at a later time, and then proceeded to write the majority decision.

Roberts is not the first justice, nor will he the last one, in which an opinion writer starts out in one direction and ends up in another. In Lee v. Weisman, Justice Anthony Kennedy actually voted to allow prayer at public school graduations, only to reverse course and declare the practice unconstitutional.

Not surprising, when a group does not get their way, they unleash the attack dogs. What better way to undermine the credibility of Roberts, who ultimately stood to his judicial restraint approach much to the chagrin of those conservatives lashing out at him.

The claim touted by a number of conservatives as switching his vote midway through deliberations, based on a CBS report, is notable because of apparent leaks (!) to the author, Jan Crawford, a known conservative sympathesizer.

The Supreme Court, however, has a proud history of being tight-lipped.